Yeah it's not optimal how much time will have to pass for each ProRender update but I'm willing to keep an open mind for a couple releases, see how it goes.
Nodal stuff: remember, I wasn't saying what I think should happen, I was "wagering" what I think WILL happen. :) Big difference. For me the #1 thing is object management / main viewport improvements and nothing else is a close second but not the point of the thread ultimately.

SInce what we expect is a different question in most cases than what we want, and predictions seem to be the mode of the day, I'll say I think this will be a bigger release than the last 2 or 3 we've seen, but probably will not have all the "broad changes" that have been requested often. Given MAXON's tendancies and the way the app is currently positioned, I would say:
Sure Thing
A big boost to ProRender functionality and performance. This is almost a slam-dunk IMO given the direction they started with, with eGPUs hitting the scene on Mac (and Mac being an AMD-centric platform), and with the general push to get people to adopt this technology. They've invested heavily in it and stated from the start it will be a phased-in tech.
I'll go with big changes to the UV workflow also. I think it's a logical and overdue thing for them at this point.
50/50
Even odds for the long-awaited (and most important IMO) improvements to the Object Manager and the impact that has on the main working viewport.
Big overhaul to remaining core modelling tools that haven't seen much love in recent years.
Further improvements to the GL previewing, assuming Apple has ramped up their GL game. Possibly they improve it some with their official eGPU support that's on the way.
Low Probability
Nodal materials system. I think with the advent of multiple rendering platforms that have their own nodal systems, and integration with C4D, this seems like something they'll leave to other companies. Nodal also tends to go away from their core, simple-to-use workflow.
Big changes to Xpresso. They might clean up the UI a bit and add a couple new nodes but can't see big changes.
New Thinking Particles / massive particles overhaul. This one is very logical from a competitive standpoint but I think the evolution and popularity of XP gives them a reason to spend their effort elsewhere, right or wrong. At this point XP is as close to a must-have add-on as you can get. Don't see that changing / MAXON undercutting that.

Meh. Typical list-bait article thin on details or real analysis of why one tool is better than the other. Pure SEO + "check out our new event" click-bait IMO. I wouldn't give any aspect of it credence in terms of buying decision. You'd be much better off talking to people in forums like this, reading detailed reviews, trying out demos.

Long-time Mac user here.
If you are OK using Win 10, then hardware-wise you can't really argue against a custom PC from a reputable company like Puget Systems. Any of them would pretty much destroy any Mac you can buy, dollar for dollar (including the new iMac Pro). They build fantastic rigs for this kind of work, do extensive burn-in testing before choosing components (so you know they'll work regardless of how you configure it) and have fantastic service. Great blog too.
Much as it pains me to say it, if I were forced to buy a new rig tomorrow it absolutely would be a Puget PC. Choose one of the models with a Designaire motherboard if you buy from Puget, unless you don't care about TB3 / the possibility of tacking an extra GPU onto your rig down the road.
When the next Mac Pro arrives that may put Mac back in the picture but who knows when that will be. Would not be surprised at all if sneak-peaked in June at WWDC but not sold until 2019.

"I sold my mum for this" lol
Those were pretty good. Thanks for posting them. The Amazon entries too — first time I've ever used them as a source of comedy. They should have a policy that all 5 star spam-reviews get replaced without the spammer knowing it, by 5 star sarcastic reviews. I may have to modify my approach to Amazon reviewing.

lol
Are you trolling me?
"Remove stuff we don't want to multi-thread"? Like they're forced to re-write everything they don't remove?
I'm as chill as chill can be... bro. Just making the observation that sometimes removing stuff from an app is nothing more than cleaning house. And yes, I take it as a good sign. None of that impacts what I do much, so I won't lose sleep over it either way... but yeah.
Hopefully more (as in additional) substantive updates from MAXON are on the way this winter.

I don't think you can make the logical jump from the list at the top of the thread being removed to "lots of things will be multi-threaded in C4D with R20." Multi-threading is not related to any of those things, in the sense of being dependent upon them (not being there). Any multi-threaded function has to be re-written and optimized such that its operations can be divided among numerous CPUs — that's the real challenge, not removing other stuff AFAIK.
More than likely the things being removed are simply to clean up the code base now that the functionality has been replaced with other technologies (Python, Melange, etc), or in some cases are just obsolete. Removing them possibly might result in benefits like faster launch times, increased stability (i.e. reduced opportunity for conflicts, dependancy issues, etc).
But I hope MAXON keeps the updates coming more than once every six months. If this is to be a big release it is to their benefit to feed us some blogitude every couple months leading up to release, to get the buzz going, etc. Keeps us interested and optimistic as well.

Meh. I understand why you might say that but think of Bloomberg online as being a little like CNN. They're often more interested in getting a "news bite" published before anyone else, rather than first determining if that "news bite" has any real meaning behind it / is actually something people should be paying attention to. What you should be looking at is the level of detail and context, and it's poor. Honestly if I were this person's editor, the story never would've been published. It may well be true, but journalistically there's nothing there. It's pure window-dressing. Nothing but vagaries and assumptions.

Nah! If it's all the same to you, stick around for a while yet. This forum is pretty good I'd say. :)
While it's not unheard of for parent companies to sell assets out from under the noses of the people working for said asset, I agree with your earlier statement that most likely that article is nothing more than fabricated crapola on the part of a web team desperate for page rank and eyeballs in an area where they don't get much.

All things being equal I tend to doubt the veracity of this story, not because it was denied (evidently? anyone have a link?) back in August but because the story itself is very thin on details. Online publications are notorious for posting "might be, could be, we're not sure and you can't disprove it" click-bait when ad revenues are low or other problems. This story, based on timing, length and topic, seems like click-bait to me.
But what Cutman said is true; doesn't matter if MAXON denied anything. Companies lie all the time about acquisitions and mergers.
That said I wouldn't be totally shocked if it happened. If the parent company feels they're over-diversified and that they stand to make more from a sale than holding onto the company long-term, they'll do it. OR, maybe there's discussions between the parent and MAXON's management where MAXON wants to go a different direction and parent tries to find a suitor.

Autodesk: there would be no C4D; they'd cannibalize it and kill it off within one release cycle. At the end they'd offer everyone a "special discount for the first year" of their BS subscription model to keep everyone on board (with Maya or MAX), then after that back to rip-off central.
Adobe: price of subscription would jump to $650-$750 for the suite (good excuse for them to raise it — which is inevitable) and within a couple cycles the quality of the software would start trending down as they added out-of-scope features and unnecessary changes and integrations.
Foundry: same as Autodesk
Black Magic: might work out... might even use their pricing model of $299. That would be pretty great. Not sure if they're big enough to make this kind of buy / absorb a development and QC team the size of MAXON's.
Can't think of anyone else in the industry with the kind of money and resources required to make that acquisition work, who would also do it right. Worst case would be Facebook or Apple, with the intent of converting it into a purely VR/AR content platform. They'd dumb it down after a couple cycles to fit their respective UI religions and that would be the end of it.

Cutman, you know from my posts and interactions with you that I've kept an open mind towards both your Houdini comments here and in general stuff you've debated at other times... but you've got an itchy trigger finger that you seem to be either unaware of or eager to use. If I might:
You're absolutely right that some people truly defied their own logic (expressed previously towards you) when they decided to read this thread and post — knowing that they usually disagree with you and that you were going to posit Houdini as an alternative platform to C4D. I mean, did ANYONE really NOT think he was going to do that when they first saw the thread title? I sure did. Doesn't take a fortune-teller to know what's coming. So either you're open to the harsh feedback we knew would be a part of his larger set of points, or you're not. If you're not, either don't read it or don't respond.
On the OTHER HAND... any software-specific forum is likely to end up a bit of a "safe space" for that software — it's the nature of the beast — people invest a lot of time and money and stick with it so their inclination (as a group) will always be towards the glass is half full. And they won't take well to being told forcefully that their platform sucks (whether it does or not). However, where you go wrong is less the force of your initial arguments than your temper (IMO).
For this thread, you go through all of your points about Houdini (no problem), your related criticisms about C4D (no problem), and your decision to jump ship (no problem). Nothing wrong with a long-time member sharing that info IMO. I'll probably do the same thing if and when I move to another platform, just to let people know what alternative I found and why it was compelling enough to make me bolt. But as soon as someone calls you out for being "tired of your complaints" about C4D, BLAM! You don't just respond in kind, you hammer them. And from there every thread follows the same pattern. The group seems to be drawn to this dysfunctional pattern over and over. I actually found this one kind of amusing because I saw it coming two weeks and many miles away.
But typically none of us (yourself included) enjoy this type of outcome, so my unsolicited and possibly useless advice is to avoid the urge to put people in their place via sledgehammer. Whether they deserve it or not is another question, but ultimately it doesn't matter — it's not the kind of medium where putting someone in their place actually teaches them something, thus altering their behavior... instead it just builds animosity / passive aggression over time.
But to get back to it, not only was I curious to read your Houdini experiences but I hope in a few months after you've used it some more and see the product more fully — warts and all — that you'll post more observations good and bad and how you're feeling about the switch. As long as its done dispassionately (including any responses to challenges), it can be useful to everyone. Hell, it might even be useful to MAXON.

Yeah I understand that's a useful thing. Wasn't trying to diminish any one feature per se. Not a big deal. I like Trapcode's stuff in general, own it, use it. Just my "big picture" perception of things.